And it continues with Bell filing a tariff notice for recovering fees for 'missed installs'.

»www.vaxination.ca/crtc/2013/Bell···_ABR.pdf

Total BS, as we've seen multiple missed appointments by Bell here while people were home waiting, with Bell's installer saying 'no one home'.

And it continues with Bell filing a tariff notice for recovering fees for 'missed installs'.

»www.vaxination.ca/crtc/2013/Bell···_ABR.pdf

Total BS, as we've seen multiple missed appointments by Bell here while people were home waiting, with Bell's installer saying 'no one home'.

As far as I read it this R&V only applies to the business rates. The new residential rates are safe for now but Bell explicitly mentioned they will want to increase in the future.

...the CRTC is no longer using the term 'GAS' and is now using HSA instead, with their decision in February.

This will affect all users, not just non-PPPOE.

HSA is different from GAS. This specific R&V would only affect a very small number of subscribers.

Dit comme un vrai Quebecois.
Do I need to translate as not to offend anyone?

quote:

---

that the mark-up applied to the Companies' wholesale business HSA services provided over fibre to the node (FTTN) infrastructure be raised from 40% to 50% in order to properly maintain the Companies' incentives to invest at the level they were under the previously approved mark-ups

---

Unfortunately there is basically zero political will. With that in mind, we come right back to Functional Separation again.

Installation of fiber in Bell conduits is regulated, I don't think Bell can actually refuse without a valid reason (like the conduit being full). That was what they got in exchange for being granted a monopoly on telecom conduits.

just thought I'd mention that TSI has NOT stated this and its only a wild guess.

http://www.vice.com/read/there-will-be-broadband-forgotten-by-the-future-some-take-the-internet-into-their- own-hands

»b4rn.org.uk/

The best solution in my opinion is government owning the lines and private business providing the service across those lines.

What exactly is that "fiber to the home portion"? One end of the fiber would end in my house, but where would the other end end? Somewhere in the manhole next to my house? Then someone would still have to build an infrastructure to connect all those fiber pieces into a working nation-wide network. Who would do that?

On any given day the two busiest highways in North America are the 401 in Toronto and the 405 in Los Angeles - neither has tolls. Notice the real operative words in the previous sentence - *in*. They are both highways which - when built - were in the suburbs - but not so any longer.

The idea is DARK FIBRE, (AKA, just the wire) which each provider would pay to use, which in concept would cover the operation of the fibre wire network, and that alone..

With the current Guv of ON dumping/selling resources to create quick cash to pay off provincial debt, it's highly doubtful they would buy anything, especially something that will require a lot of money for constant upgrades.

Ding ding ding ding ding.

If the government "regulated" the toll rates on the 407 forcing them into an approved toll schedule like tom_tom is proposing, you can be damn sure that there would be lots of traffic with no additional lanes added, it would be riddled with more potholes than the 401 and it would take hours for snow to be removed.

Whoa whoa whoa there, hang on! On one hand you're saying private corporations should be free to do what they want and own what is essentially essential Canadian infrastructure to make money, and then on the other hand you're saying that they aren't free to make money because the government needs to regulate them.

I doubt I'm the only one here who sees the complete and total hypocrisy in your view on this matter.

Just like you said, the government is good at providing things like water, sewage... I would say the government should provide and maintain the fibre to the home portion of the network and have handoff points where private ISP's takeover. They would lease the infrastructure at stable rates where everyone pays the same. The differentiation would come in speeds, capacities, etc, but there would no longer be a situation where incumbents can crush independents and create essentially a duopoly.

It's not better because it's privately owned, it's better because it costs more.

You are comparing it to other highway systems owned by governments. It's better if you compare 401 to 407 (which is privately owned). I have never experienced any traffic on 407, there are fewer (basically none) potholes, and the snow is removed almost instantly.
Of course, it costs a lot to use 407. But - same as with the Internet situation - the main issue is that the regulations imposed by the government are too weak. If the regulators did their work properly, we would have much lower rates on 407 now, while still maintaining the higher standard in comparison to 401 and other provincially-owned highways (407 profits are huge).

You pay for little traffic, no potholes and to have the snow removed instantly.
It's not better because it's privately owned, it's better because it costs more.

It's better if you compare 401 to 407 (which is privately owned). I have never experienced any traffic on 407, there are fewer (basically none) potholes, and the snow is removed almost instantly.
Of course, it costs a lot to use 407.

As for the traffic in Toronto, the blame lies squarely in the hands of Jane Jacobs and her supporters who revolted against expressway construction in the 60s and 70s, not the government. Were it up to them, things would have been a lot different. Furthermore, while this may come as a shock, the actual quality of the highways in Toronto and the GTA themselves are vastly superior to anything else you'll find in a freeze/thaw zone. The design standards of the provincial highways are also second-to-none in North America.

Name another company that can send a letter to the arctic for 63 cents, then we'll talk.

Are you kidding me? Have you tried to use any of the freeways in Toronto? Terrible traffic everywhere. Can't get anywhere on time, because of the congestion. Do you want to have that kind of situation with your Internet connection?

Canada Post? Every year higher prices, with service being worse and worse. Communal "super" boxes instead of door-to-door delivery, no delivery on Tuesdays and Thursdays in many communities. Putting tons of spam in your mailbox. Do you want your Internet infrastructure to managed by this kind of people?